Fanciful hold on Commonwealth

When Brexiters cast around for plausible candidates to replace the trade that will be lost with the EU, the British Commonwealth is generally quite high up the list.

The idea was aired at a meeting of the organisation’s heads of government in London. In reality, such plans are quixotic. Not only is the arithmetic of the economies involved highly unfavourable but, unlike the EU, the Commonwealth does not come remotely close to forming a trade bloc with which the UK can have a single relationship.

The UK exports nearly five times as much to the EU as to the Commonwealth. Most of the countries involved are small; almost all are far from the UK. Proximity still matters in trade. Moreover, the great attraction of the EU is as an integrated single bloc. Companies acquire not just access to the world’s second-biggest consumer market but also the chance to knit into fast and sophisticated supply chains. The Commonwealth, by contrast, does not function as a trading area.

Some credulous commentators place faith in a “Canzuk” bloc emerging, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK. But Canada’s most important trading partner by far is the US, and its regulation and trade policy are orientated towards its southern neighbour. Australia and New Zealand are closely aligned with each other, but beyond that they are far more concerned with China and other Asian markets than with English-speaking countries on the far side of the world.

The UK’s decision to join the European Economic Community in 1973 dealt a sharp blow to New Zealand, which had enjoyed privileged access to the British market. But in truth a global trading bloc anchored on the UK was already disappearing.

Whatever affection certain Britons might have for their far-flung former colonies, the idea that they are a replacement for doorstep access to one of the world’s biggest markets is fanciful. London, April 19